Below is the ongoing discussion I've been having with a valued member of the community here. We agreed that since this topic seems common enough in the forums that we should post it out of the messages so others can gain from its input.
"To: Sangeet Khatri
Sent on: November 30, 2013 1:57 AM
I've respected your input in the forums and I was wondering if you wouldn't mind helping me through a couple questions.
I see you think 4820k isn't worth it over the 4770k. I've been struggling with the prices of the 2011 boards and would love to focus my finances on graphics.
I've been saving what I can the last year and can throw between 1500 and 1700 dollars at a system. I am aware of the environmental problems with computer components and I try to minimize my impact by getting devices that can be built upon with minimal materials needing replacement. The system will be used for game development as well as hopefully handle whatever games come out over the next 4-5 years.
I'm going to take your advice and go with the 4770k. Unfortunately, I've put in a dozen hours more of research into 2011 boards. Whether its Gigabyte or Asus reviews are wrought with warnings about DOA boards, or ones that fail within a year of purchase. Can you recommend a few options you would consider if in my position?
Thanks so much for your contributions, if you prefer to make this public so others can gain from your responses I'm happy to post it up.
From: Sangeet Khatri
Sent on: November 30, 2013 3:27 AM
You sent me the wrong link brother. Send me the link which is available on the upper left corner which says "Permalink" with a text box after it. Send me that link.
The advantage of the 4820k over the 4770k is only when you are having more than two GPU's in your rig which is by the way not recommended by me, because it does not give proper scaling, so for upto 2 GPU's, the 4770k is a good CPU.
Anyways planning a build for $1500~$1700 for you. It would be for gaming, game development. I think for game development, the 6 cores and 12 threads of the 4930k from Socket 2011 would be more suitable.
Also tell me what type of game development do you do? I mean what tasks do you do? That would help me in determining that what you need in a CPU.
Let's see if I can fit in a 4930k in there, if not then I would stick with the 4770k.
Will post a build soon, in about 10-20 minutes."
"From: Sangeet Khatri
Sent on: November 30, 2013 3:49 AM
As for now, this is the build I recommend :
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks
CPU: Intel Core i7-4770K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor ($279.99 @ NCIX US)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($29.99 @ NCIX US)
Motherboard: Asus Z87-A ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($94.99 @ Newegg)
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws X Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($109.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Samsung 840 EVO 250GB 2.5" Solid State Disk ($149.99 @ B&H)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 2TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($79.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: Asus GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB Video Card ($699.99 @ NCIX US)
Case: Fractal Design Define R4 w/Window (Black Pearl) ATX Mid Tower Case ($74.99 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: Corsair Professional 750W 80+ Gold Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply ($89.99 @ Newegg)
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2013-11-30 14:43 EST-0500)
But answer a few questions, that would help me improve this rig more :
1. What kind of game development do you do? And what kind of task do you perform. I want to estimate that how much intensive is the work you do. Hence tell me whatever type of work do you do.
2. Do you use SSD? Or do you want to have SSD? SSD do not have any advantage for gaming, but they make loading times better and makes opening programs, booting times faster. But it does not have any advantage on gaming and Video Editing like stuff which are CPU and GPU bound.
3. Do you overclock? If not, then it is recommended to do overclocking, because it would increase performance by a lot amount.
Sent on: November 30, 2013 4:17 AM
Woops, I thought that link looked wrong..:
I love the suggestions you've made though. Do you find the pre-fab liquid coolers unreasonable? I've been out of the computer world a while and was wowed by the construction as its similar to some cooling systems for buildings I've installed. That, of course doesn't mean it should be acquired though.
I was recommended the Kraken over the Corsair equivalent due to pump and fan inefficacies in the latter.
I know nothing little about SSDs but I started to look at their options for cache but I'm still reading up on it. It's a nicety that would be great to fit in.
I definitely intend to overclock.
The development work I've been doing is of entirely hobbyist quality. Code-light programs like Unity3d (but I am taking online courses for c++, java, and python), meshing/sculpting programs, and a fair amount of Adobe work. It would be nice to get good, but I'm a big believer in enjoying the journey more than the destination.
From: Sangeet Khatri
Sent on: November 30, 2013 3:17 PM
---> I would not recommend the Pre-filled Liquid coolers because :
1. They are expensive than Air Coolers.
2. The Air Coolers do better job at cheaper prices.
3. They are prone to damage, I mean a slight cut on the pipes can cause the liquid inside it to leak which can cause a lot of problems.
4. The Air coolers are quieter than the Water Coolers.
Hence I would recommend the Phanteks PH-TC14PE Air cooler over any water cooler. If you want something that is more silent but still good performing, then go for the Noctua NH-D14. They both cost about 75 dollars.
---> Well.. if you don't know much about SSD's then it is better to not go with them. They are nothing but waste of money in my opinion.
---> Well.. then you are someone like me, I am also a kind of hobbyist. Hence I understand you. I am currently learning Python which is a great language. But I am not much into game development. Infact, I am not there at all. I play some games, but not too much. I am more of the Free and Open Source Guy. I love Linux and I always find myself using the Command Line more than the GUI. Hence I completely understand that what kind of guy you are.
--> The tasks that you are doing would be easily handled by the 4770k, though the 4930k would perform better in the same tasks since they are mostly Multi Threaded, but let me see if I am able to fit in the 4930k in that budget. Let's see what I can do.
--> Removed SSD,
--> Changed CPU,
--> Changed GPU to R9-290x which should be better with Adobe applications and other applications since most of them advantage from the OpenCL which AMD has and Nvidia does not have.
--> RAM changed with Quad Channel RAM since LGA 2011 is quad channel.
--> Change PSU to a XFX 80+ Bronze Semi Modular 650W PSU. It is good quality PSU which is available right now for an incredible deal.
Note : The R9-290x listed has the reference cooler from AMD which is highly inefficient and noisy. Hence it is recommended to wait for the custom cooler versions of the 290x to launch from the manufacturers like Gigabyte, Asus, XFX, etc. The reference cooler is way too noisy and inefficient to be recommended. Hence I would suggest waiting for the 290x with custom coolers from manufacturers to launch.
As much as i was sold on the 4930k for a while Sangeet, you've made a strong case for the 4770k that I feel rather settled on it. I suspect the nominal differences in rendering time would be acceptable. If I had deadlines, or knew how to use the development programs I tinker with to their fullest then the six core would be worth exploring.
I've also been waiting to save for this build since January this year and I'm not eager to wait any longer. Thanks again to Sangeet!
But believe me. If you are using this build on the long term, like 5+ years. Then the 6 core 12 thread 4930k would have some serious advantage over the 4 core 8 thread 4770k.
The 4930k would always have the lead for like at least 4 years when it comes to the Multi Threaded performance of the Standard 4 core i7.
Another thing to note : I made a mistake at the very beginning. The Nvidia GPUs does not have good OpenCL performance which is important for the Editing and Development Stuff.
In comparision, AMD has like more than twice as better OpenCL performance and which would come in way too much handy. Hence my advice would still be to wait for the R9-290x with custom cooling solutions since Nvidia does not provide even par performance when it comes to OpenCL.
Okay, let's make this clear. There are two types of graphics accleration standards : OpenCL and CUDA.
And basically everything uses OpenCL for graphics acceleration because it is Open Source and hence can be used by anyone without a license fees wheras not a lot of applications use CUDA, the reason being the Proprietary nature of the CUDA standard. At past Adobe used to support CUDA, but now they too are moving to OpenCL.
What is means when it comes to performance :
AMD : AMD offers very good OpenCL performance than Nvidia, but CUDA perfomance on it sucks. Nvidia : Nvidia offers very good CUDA performance, but OpenCL performance on it sucks.
Hence since most applications use OpenCL anyways, therefore it is better to choose the OpenCL over CUDA and hence AMD over Nvidia.
Hence you should wait a little more for the AMD R9-290x with custom cooling solutions to launch. That would also allow you to get the 4930k. Hence a little more wait would be the win-win situation.